Transcript for Interview with Rachana Kamtekar on Plato's Moral Psychology

Read the Full Interview Transcript.

Why do we do things even when we know we shouldn't? This could be dating a specific type of person you know is bad for you. This could be drinking, smoking, eating more than you know you should. When it comes to self-improvement, this is one of the most important barriers to overcome. And yet Plato thinks that most of us have the complete wrong idea of why we give into temptation and even self-sabotage.

My guest today is Cornell's Rachana Kamtekar, a legendary Plato scholar who will unpack for us what Plato's understanding of human nature and psychology has to offer us in overcoming temptation in our own lives.

---

0. Introduction

Johnathan Bi: One of the more puzzling statements to come out of Socrates' mouth, and there's a lot, so that's a high bar, is that we never act against our knowledge of the good. And prima facie, an issue that pops up is what is called a cratic action, right? Action where we directly act against our judgments of what is good. So I know I shouldn't eat another scoop of ice cream, I eat it anyway. I know I shouldn't cheat on my spouse, but then I slip up. So how do we make sense of Socrates' claim in light of a cratic action?

Rachana Kamtekar: I'll start with an analogy that Socrates gives us in the Protagoras, which is with vision. So when you see two men in the distance, but one is closer to you than the other, you might think that the closer one is taller. But if it really matters to get it right, which one is taller, you will measure. You might use a ruler, you might use the science of optics, and that will correct your appearances, your visual appearances of which appears larger. So his idea is that choice is just the same. In choice, we are making judgments about which pleasure is larger, which pleasure is smaller. And if our life depends on it, if our salvation and life depends on it, then they won't act contrary to their knowledge of what is best. So he's not denying that I might judge that the ice cream is more pleasant than the healthy body that I'll have in the long run, and he's not forced to say that I make the wrong judgment. What he's saying is that instead of my scientific knowledge, say, what is governing my judgment is the appearance of the yummy, melting strawberry scoop in front of me.

And that is just like the case where I might be tempted to say that the closer object is larger, but when it matters, I override my appearance-based judgment. And I think he's saying, if you have knowledge, you can override your appearance-based judgment about the desirability of the ice cream. Now, one thing that I think is in Plato's favor is that sometimes temptations give us little reasons for why it's just a scoop of ice cream, it's not going to make a habit, it's not really going to give me indigestion or make me fat or whatever it is.

I mean, I think we have those little conversations in our heads all the time, even when we say, oh, but I know I shouldn't, but instead I'm giving into temptation. But what is that giving into temptation? It's a way of describing, and another quite phenomenologically accurate way of describing it is that the ice cream appears better than it is or more pleasant than it is.

Johnathan Bi: Right, I see. When you are overpowered by the ice cream, you are actually just judging it to be good. You are fooled by that appearance. What I want to do now is I want to explore a few other competing theories of what might be going on. But before we do that, tell us about the stakes. Like, why is this an important view? Like, why is it so important for Socrates in this case to claim that we never act against our own knowledge of the good?